The article itself contains direct quotes from the company on thr subject matter without tailoring the language in order to misrepresent or sensationalize the facts. That being said, the articles headline is the exception. It's specifically worded to invoke concern in the reader for a relatively mundane subject. Unfortuantely the article doesn't provide any new or insightful information. The content itself is trustworthy while not necessarily worth reading.

I don't think there is really any new information in this article other than one person may have leaked some private (but anonymous) recordings. It then provides very little information about that.

Basically just quotes a press release from google while offering little insight or analysis

The headline is specifically sensational - it makes it seem like a much bigger practice than what it is revealed to actually be.

While the headline feels sensational in relation to the overall article, it is accurate in describing what has actually taken place. Yet, I've rated this article surface level because it is not as it seems. Google is only listening to 0.2% of audio clips and they're not from user accounts - and its for improving their vocal recognition products. However, not much information is provided beyond this.